If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 8:00:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
Comparing airplanes to birds is moot in this respect. You have birds achieving thrust by reshaping the wing by utilizing muscular structures in the body and planes achieving thrust without manipulating the wing.
If we assume that low wing is a better design, then birds would still be high wing because muscles achieve work by pulling, so flying would be impossible!

My initial point is that high-wing designs are inherently more stable
when moving through a dynamic atmosphere, and evolution proves it. We see
this in insects and bats as well. It's as simple as *not being top heavy*.
It's a gravitational factor.

Says you, the anal retentive dope who debates everything and
anything with non sequitur deflections and then finally after
trolling with a litany of insults, broken chains of thought
sequences, and non-deductive deductions, eventually just results
to lying, repeating misinformation ad nauseam, and packaging
the entire mess laden with grammatical errors that a fifth
grader wouldn't make.

Says you, the anal retentive dope who debates everything and
anything with non sequitur deflections and then finally after
trolling with a litany of insults, broken chains of thought
sequences, and non-deductive deductions, eventually just results
to lying, repeating misinformation ad nauseam, and packaging
the entire mess laden with grammatical errors that a fifth
grader wouldn't make.

Well thank goodness commercial airlines dont use low wing planes. I wouldnt want to travel in an inherently unstable death trap. Did I mention I fly Pipers because I like them much better than Cessnas?